Tag Archives: nancy pelosi

As I said before, this is what happens when people blindly follow someone instead of looking into what he is really attempting to do. Conservatives warned everyone, they were labeled every name in the book. Now look, proof they were right all along.

Democrats continue to try to dismiss the evidence that Obamacare will dramatically increase the cost of insurance for people who buy it on their own. But on Thursday, the Ohio Department of Insurance announced that, based on the rates submitted by insurers to date, the average individual-market health insurance premium in 2014 will come in around $420, “representing an increase of 88 percent” relative to 2013. “We have warned of these increases,” said Lt. Gov. Mary Taylor in a statement. “Consumers will have fewer choices and pay much higher premiums for their health insurance starting in 2014.”

The rates that Ohio reported are proposed rates; the Department of Insurance still has to formally approve them. “A total of 14 companies proposed rates for 214 plans to the Department. Projected costs from the companies for providing coverage for the required [by Obamacare] essential health benefits ranged from $282.51 to $577.40 for individual health insurance plans.”

It’s called “rate shock,” but it’s not shocking to people who understand the economics of health insurance. In August 2011, Milliman, one of the nation’s leading actuarial firms, predicted that Obamacare would increase individual-market premiums in Ohio by 55 to 85 percent. This past March, the Society of Actuaries projected that the law would increase premiums in that market by 81 percent. Like good players on “The Price is Right,” they both came in just under the Dept. of Insurance’s figure.

She’s already done this a few times, now she has decided to expand upon her original talking point. Now Pelosi claims its Bush’s fault because he appointed the commissioner… Ignoring the fact that Douglas Shulman met with Obama 118 times… Sure, nothing suspect about that at all… Right?

Younger Americans are central to this vision of broader insurance coverage. First, they are supposed to participate in insurance coverage, and the mandate and penalty are there to make sure that this comes to fruition. Second, by having the young in the insurance pool with their low health care costs, the insurance offered in the exchanges would be more attractive and affordable to older and sicker Americans. In effect, young Americans are supposed to be both key participants and the piggy bank of the expansion effort.

Unfortunately, health insurance is a product, not a social vision. What we know to be true thanks to ample survey and analytic research is that in 2014, Obamacare will cause insurance premiums to rise sharply for the healthy and young. When it comes to products, Americans aged 18 to 40 act like consumers of all ages everywhere: They have a price point, and when the price gets too high, they get busy making changes.

Evidence of these changes was gathered in late March and early April of this year, when the American Action Forum sponsored the first national poll of this demographic, specifically testing what effects various premium increases would have on consumers’ willingness to purchase coverage. Respondents were those who already purchase insurance and had very specific information regarding their monthly premiums and the penalty they would pay if they failed to continue to buy insurance. They were also provided with the dollars they would have to fork over if premiums rose 10 percent, 20 percent or 30 percent.

The results are illuminating. In this group of current insurance purchasers, only 83 percent will still purchase if premiums rise 10 percent; 65 percent, if premiums rise 20 percent; and only 55 percent, if premiums rise 30 percent. The economic lesson is simple: As premiums rise, eventually, some consumers reach a price point at which they simply stop buying health insurance.

Never wasting a crisis, Democrat Nancy Pelosi does what she does best, finds a way to push her anti-conservative group agenda when questioned about the IRS scandal.

Roll Call : House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s two-paragraph statement on allegations that the IRS targeted tea party organizations for extra review could have come from any concerned lawmaker Monday.

But a single sentence tying the IRS’ alleged misconduct with a controversial Supreme Court decision signaled that Democratic leaders see an opening to restart the debate over the nation’s campaign finance system.

“We must overturn Citizens United, which has exacerbated the challenges posed by some of these so-called ‘social welfare’ organizations,” the California Democrat said.

One of many outcomes of the 2010 Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ruling is that partisan groups have in huge numbers taken advantage of new opportunities to register as tax-exempt “social welfare” organizations to, albeit indirectly, raise money for their political candidates and causes.

The ruling has been wildly divisive, with Democrats calling it an affront to a fair and regulated political system and Republicans hailing it a landmark in facilitating free speech. Though liberal-leaning groups stepped up their game in the 2012 election cycle, the first groups to take advantage of this new playing field after the decision came down were those with conservative slants.

Pelosi’s suggestion that this court ruling could have planted one of the seeds of IRS misconduct — that agency officials felt a need to scrutinize conservative organizations given the overwhelming number of applications being filed in a post-Citizens United landscape — could help shape future Democratic talking points on the IRS allegations as they continue to develop.

So first she supported the Occupy protesters, then she didn’t when they threatened to protest the DNC, now she’s raising $400,000 at the home of the lady who had them ousted from Zuccotti Park? Maybe they should stop trying to start fights at CPAC and go Occupy outside of Nancy’s home like Unions did to bankers.

Politico Influence reports that House minority leader Nancy Pelosi and minority whip Steny Hoyer raised $400,000 last night at a fundraiser held at the home of Democratic lobbyists Heather and Tony Podesta. Heather Podesta runs the firmHeather Podesta and Partners.

Heather Podesta’s clients include liberal bogeymen such as the for-profit education industry and Brookfield Asset Management, the real-estate company that owns Zuccotti Park in lower Manhattan and which ultimately gave the NYPD the green light to evict the Occupy Wall Street movement from its grounds in November 2011. Pelosi is a vocal supporter of the occupiers, having once said, “God bless them.”

Apparently not only does she say things that she refuses to explain, like her multiple claims about knowing some thing about Newt Gingrich that she refuses to share with the American people. But she makes ridiculous claims to rich Hollywood liberals in order to get them to dump their wealth into more Democrats campaigns. Despite the fact a lot of Hollywood liberals already admitted they won’t donate a dime this time to Obama…

Pelosi met with a group of more than 50 fundraisers and consultants Monday at the house of Haim Saban, the billionaire television producer who leads the ownership group of Spanish-language television network Univision.

“They identified between 50 and 75 seats that are definitely vulnerable,” one attendee told the Reporter. “They went through each of the races. It was truly one of the more focused presentations that I’ve seen.”

Occasionally the Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi pops up and gives a speech that leaves most people’s heads shaking in disbelief. This video below is yet another one of them. In the video you can hear Nancy making the claim that education brings the most money into the US Treasury. Perhaps she is saying well educated individuals are the reason the US Treasury has money coming in, but these well educated individuals who are wealthy, would be opposite of the Occupy Wall Street crowd whom she has voiced support for. So either Pelosi is having another moment where she contradicts herself, or she is once again just making a statement that pops in to her head with out providing any explanation or sources to back it up.

Now this is just one of the many nit-witted statements the Democrat Minority Leader has made over the years.